get the best of reddit, delivered once a week

I am not an OKC fan though I wanted them to win this game, but joking aside, KAT needs to do something about watching his stamina levels.

I do think he is sometimes playing too aggresively to last 4 quarters, and I'm guessing the reason the team collapses in the 3rd quarter might also have something to do with it. Westbrook is also a guard, KAT is a center.

All game? You mean mostly in the first quarter when KAT would waste game 6 in the WCF levels of energy trying to score just two points while Adams obviously didn't give a fuck. It's no wonder the Wolves collapse in the 3rd quarter the way KAT is playing.

I don't even visit those, since I can't subscribe to their content, what's with the dichotomy, can't an issue like overly strict politically correct rules be interpreted on its own and not within some kind of internet war against fundamentalists of all sorts, and btw I am not necessarily "outraged" by the SJW moderation, I am just bothered by it.

What I am saying is you don't need a strawman or survivor bias, or enough people like that to exist irl, to prove that there are too many non commonsensical people in the SJW related movements and that they can can affect what you do on the internet (which is the reason most people are complaining).

In the example I mentioned above, completely irrelevant things are taken of context, and described as ableism. Then if someone complains about the absolutist SJW rules being applied, he's gonna get some kind of retort along the lines of "sjw's like that don't even exist it just a scapegoat created by cherry picking some of the wost examples".

That's funny because in some (large enough) subreddits I've seen that you can actually get your comment deleted because using the phrase "this is crazy" is supposed to be "ableism". And at any rate even if it's very rare that you'll encounter them irl, what does that mean, I'm pretty sure they get to affect communities on the internet to a certain degree and that's enough of a reason to be concerned?

And I am not discrediting their values or anything (like they'd immediately jump to the conclusion I'm doing), it's that the execution very often just lacks common sense and comes off like somebody is on a power trip trying to portray people as immoral or something.

I think KAT is to a certain extent being favored by the fact he played for a team no one bothered to play any real defense against. I'm not gonna compare him with Porzingis in that regard but with Anthony Davis, imo people act like KAT is AD but "poised to be just better", but the thing is AD had like an entire playoff team adjusting their defense against him and would still score 45 on them if needed. Can KAT get on that level, instead of just having more efficient stats while playing for a team that was tanking, hypothetically yes, but it's not like he had a chance to demonstrate that playing for the 2015 Wolves.

With the kind of defense he faced it's not even certain yet that he can consistently be a threat to go and shoot over his defender like Durant does, or have some other Nowitzki style "unguardable shot".

And it needs to be said, though it most definitely doesn't mean shit, that in the games someone really wanted to play defense against him, (in the Towns vs Okafor match-ups) he seemed to have a bit of trouble beeing that efficient.

Why is this fucking bullshit that rears its ugly head that looks like some effeminate fucking dumbass manager type everywhere so damn popular. It's also underpinning the "agile" methodology in programming, and afaik the most general version of this whole thing, is to turn the ultimate goal of a scientific / engineering work, to appeasing the "status quo" financially backing it, in a competition of arbitrary pointless and pedantic shit designed to minimize the status quo's "risk", and for most of the time to succesfuly promote those really willing to suck up.

The funny thing is that even though it's completely retarded, due to the fact that it consists of "quantitative metrics", it comes off as more scientific or something, it's probably the worst version of cargo cult sciense so far.

I think I replied to you specifically in some other thread that the Chrisitan doctrine, or mythos if you don't believe in any of it,

speaks of a more cruel austere and mighty god in the OT

the way god was acting towards humans then was a consequence of the primordial sin

however god himself did not want this to be that way, so he himself sent his son to "fulfill" parts of the law by his sacrifice, and make them no longer needed, and via his teachings provide the actual ethics humans should follow and based on which the law should be interpreted

so the story doesn't end with humans disobeying god and entering a harsh world with god being a cruel tyrant that demands worship, but with a path to salvation given by jesus

You can bring a lot of different quite possibly valid arguments to criticize Christianity, but that the Bible with the teachings of Jesus included encourages humans bringing vile punishments on each other, that's just wrong, you're the one who is cherry picking, the Christian teachings are consistent enough in this aspect, and anyone that diverges off them is probably not acting according to them in the first place.

According to Chritianity anything written in the Old Testament is supposed to only be valid if it does not contradict what Jesus said himself in the New Testament. Jesus also brought the concept of repentence. Most Christians interpret the saying "don't judge and you will not be judged" as basically dictating that the kind of hard punishments described in the Old Testament shouldn't be applied, and it is up to God himself to make the final judgement. So that's the context you are missing isn't it? The entire presence of Jesus on Earth? The god of the Old Testament was supposed to be a lot more cruel, since humans basically decided that he would be like that by trying to "eat from the forbidden fruit", which is metaphorically to antagonize god or something.

Those who claim that Ancient Macedonians are separate from Ancient Greeks refer to some Greek historians who considered the Macedonians as hill men/Barbarians.

I think the historical consensus is that they were due to linguistic evidence that predates even the classical period (and like I said even in case they weren't the mix was basically complete by around 100AD)

About the people that speak ntopia, you said that they don't like to be referred to as Macedonians. Can you tell me how do they feel?

I can't speak for them all since that side of my family is from near the Bulgarian border, and afaik any negativity existing about the current situation is mostly in some areas in Western Macedonia near the border with FYROM. And I'd also have to talk with a lot more people aged around 70 or more than I could get a chance too.

Generally what I know is they consider themselves either just Greek, or that the whole thing is somewhat irrelevant (and that they might be a "mix of everything but it doesn't matter"). The older generations have a bit of a thing for preserving the "ntopia" dialect but it's mostly out of nostalgia, respect for their own deceased ancestors, and a very small amount of biterness since part of their tradition was surpressed to an extent (they weren't supposed to speak like that in public, though some old folks still do, especially when drunk lol), however noone realy makes any connection of the above and a "national identity", and at least in Serres I don't think they ever identified as Makedonski or how it's called. A few left to Bulgaria in the Greek Civil war but this was more about political reasons (participated in communist led movements), and my only relative there considers himself to be both Greek and Bulgarian.

Like I said this is the case in some areas around the Serres region, I've heard in Western Macedonia there a few who are more hardcore about it, and there are probably families related to what you mentioned those "forced out of their homeland", but still if you ask anyone aged under 35 it's practically impossible they wouldn't identify as Greek or speak more than 100 words in slavomacedonian.

Some keep to a more balanced version of the story claiming that present day "FYROM"ians are descendent from both Slavs and Ancient Macedonians and that we can trace our ancestry and hence our history all the way back to Alexander despite the fact that we kept our Slavic language and culture.

The thing is it is exceptionally unlikely that you are descendant from only the Ancient Macedonians, but not the Ancient Greeks. It dosn't make sense since Ancient Macedonians were indeed Greek, but even if they fully weren't, the distinction more or less ceased like at least 2000 years ago.

So it is very conceivable that people in FYROM are descendant of them (Ancient Macedonians and other Ancient Greeks), just as Greeks might have slavic ancestors, the problem is that by mentioning only Ancient Macedonia, it's like trying to disintegrate greek history without any actual evidence for it either.

The other problem is that many people in FYROM regard around 200 000 people in Northern Greece as a "Macedonian minority", except they themselves don't like that term, even those aged 60+ that speak "ntopia" (some variation of the bulgarian language, one of my great grandmothers spoke it) other than maybe just 5000 people in Florina or sth. This will sure piss them off as much as the historical claims.

In general I am ok with a name like North Macedonia and some kind of official stance by the FYROM government that they accept the entire geek history as part of their heritage and not just Ancient Macedonia's.

Thank you kindly for being a paragon of reason that stood against the countless fervent fanatics holding irrational beliefs about this mind numbingy terrible game, without any empiric Evidence to justify their claims, and at the same time clinging to a False God hoping that a magic fairy in the sky would answer their prayers about the video game meeting their horribly delusional and abhorrently brainless and simple minded Faith (tm) in it not being a disgrace to the gaming community .

He played a lot different than LeBron, he was a point forward who could shoot but also slowly post up any guard, not that fast and athletic but with above average quickness and anticipation (maybe kind of like Larry Bird), but in some sense he was the closest thing to LeBron in european basketball, he would just make the entire team better.

I am not criticizing how Americans view this issue, in fact in a diverse and multi cultural society it might be how you should do things.

It's kind of difficult for me to write about this, since there's some kind of cultural barrier, and some people will read it like I am justifying racist stereotypes or sth, but I am just pointing out that it is very unlikely that the Spanish players were being racist. They just don't interpret it that way. They obviously aren't going to repeat the offense now that they understood how it's viewed elsewhere.

And yes, while its not a big deal, it does reflect the sensationalized perspective which people have towards members of our race, which is a big deal and does affect how we are treated.

But this is only the case in America, most of the rest of the world wouldn't regard this kind of thing or any "no negative stereotypes" as racism. I mean when it comes to this picture did anyone from mainland China really complain about it? It was mostly Americans that did, cause there is a difference between what is considered racist.

I am from southern europe and I can't see any negative connotations or racism in the photo, I mean yeah their eyes are different, so what? But if you are in America where the place is a lot more multicultural, doing that kind of thing is taken like it's implying Asians are different than everyone else.

FYI there is another trick where the fourier series is basically finding a "polynomial on the complex unit circle" that is equal to the function. (you transform from f(x) : R->R to F(z) : unit circle -> R, with F being a polynomial, all the eiωtn terms are the same as zn with z on the unit circle).

The discrete tranform is iirc then given by standard polynomial approximation techniques done with the F(z) polynomials.

The fact that f is periodic is what makes it basically "defined on a circle and not the real line", but there is also a technique that involves the riemann sphere, on which both the unit circle and the real line are circles and which lets you transform non periodic functions in a similar way (the fourier transform)

The above is helpful cause it makes the whole thing basically a change of variables.

Another thing to note is that the eix functions (cos + i * sin) are both square integrable and easy to differentiate (eigenfunctions of differentation) which shows why they might be that desirable to transform to a sum of them and not some other group of functions.